Searching for GOD...

[Gordon]

Alright then God is what they themselves define as mythical but act in their avoidance as though He is anything but.

I define centaurs as being mythical, so am I just avoiding them? Do tell.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I define centaurs as being mythical, so am I just avoiding them? Do tell.

Of course you aren't avoiding centaurs.
But like centaurs you have your own definition of God, for what ever reason decided he is mythical but then behave as if he wasn't by your psychological and emotional evasion

[Gordon]

Of course you aren't avoiding centaurs.
But like centaurs you have your own definition of God, for what ever reason decided he is mythical but then behave as if he wasn't by your psychological and emotional evasion

Poppycock - I don't have my own definition of God, and since I've yet to see one that is meaningful then that we are dealing with the mythical is a reasonable conclusion in these circumstances.

Perhaps you can provide the missing meaningful definition of God - so, you have one to hand? 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Chunderer,

Alright then God is what they themselves define as mythical but act in their avoidance as though He is anything but.

Empty assertion noted; doesn't wash though. Even before we get to your complete and utter absence of a method of any kind to distinguish your claim from mistake, delusion etc as it is your claim then it's your job to tell others what you mean by it if you expect them to take you seriously. So far, all you have is white noise. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Poppycock - I don't have my own definition of God,

In which case why are you saying God is mythical?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Chunderer,

Empty assertion noted; doesn't wash though. Even before we get to your complete and utter absence of a method of any kind to distinguish your claim from mistake, delusion etc as it is your claim then it's your job to tell others what you mean by it if you expect them to take you seriously. So far, all you have is white noise.

Sorry Blue but mythical is a definition we know that because that is how you guys define God. Why do you describe him thus.......?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Chunderer,

In which case why are you saying God is mythical?

Just to note that what's actually being said is that you no more provide a reason for others not to think your claim to be mythical than, say, unicornists provide a reason for you not to think their clam to be mythical.

It's simple enough.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Chunderer,

Sorry Blue but mythical is a definition we know that because that is how you guys define God. Why do you describe him thus.......?

Wrong again.

And the answer is that thinking people have no choice but to think "god" to be mythical for the same reason that you have no choice but to think "unicorn" to be mythical. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Chunderer,

Just to note that what's actually being said is that you no more provide a reason for others not to think your claim to be mythical

Not an answer Hillside. Why do you define God as mythical?

[Gordon]

In which case why are you saying God is mythical?

The absence of a meaningful definition - so, do you have one or not?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The absence of a meaningful definition - so, do you have one or not?

That is not the definition of mythical....again.....why do you think God is mythical.

[Gordon]

That is not the definition of mythical....again.....why do you think God is mythical.

Evading again, Vlad. So, do you have s meaningful definition of God or not?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Evading again, Vlad. So, do you have s meaningful definition of God or not?

Once again Gordon why is God mythical?
You are in trouble because if you say what it is about God which makes him mythical you would have to give a meaningful definition........and you've already said there isn't one...............bad luck son.

[Gordon]

Once again Gordon why is God mythical?
You are in trouble because if you say what it is about God which makes him mythical you would have to give a meaningful definition........and you've already said there isn't one...............bad luck son.

I've told you; the absence of a meaningful definition - the key word here is meaningful.

Say I asked a professional zoologist for a meaningful definition of a kangaroo, this would be sufficient (since it is meaningful) for me to check that there are such things in reality and also not confuse kangaroos with, say, frogs.

So, all you need do now is provide a meaningful (hint - this is a key term) that I can check exists on the same basis as I can check that kangaroos exist. So, can you?

If not then I can reasonably place your God in the same box as other religious myths, along with Ra, Zeus and Apollo.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I've told you; the absence of a meaningful definition - the key word here is meaningful.

Say I asked a professional zoologist for a meaningful definition of a kangaroo, this would be sufficient (since it is meaningful) for me to check that there are such things in reality and also not confuse kangaroos with, say, frogs.

So, all you need do now is provide a meaningful (hint - this is a key term) that I can check exists on the same basis as I can check that kangaroos exist. So, can you?

If not then I can reasonably place your God in the same box as other religious myths, along with Ra, Zeus and Apollo.

The lack of a meaningful definition is not the meaning of mythical. For example Unicorns have a meaningful definition and are still mythical. Given that ,God cannot be mythical because of a lack of a meaningful definition. Why then is God mythical .


The game looks up Gordon and I have lost any respect I had for you 

[Gordon]

The lack of a meaningful definition is not the meaning of mythical. For example Unicorns have a meaningful definition and are still mythical. Given that ,God cannot be mythical because of a lack of a meaningful definition. Why then is God mythical .


The game looks up Gordon and I have lost any respect I had for you 

No they don't Vlad - unless meaningful means anything you can imagine, and if so then your choice of 'God' sits well alongside centaurs and leprechauns - mind you I've yet to see your definition but it will hopefully be more meaningful than saying that a centaur is 'half man and half horse'!

I shall wear your disapproval with pride and a cheeky wee grin.

[SusanDoris]

#6972 Leonard James

Ah, well said. That's a perfect summing up. It would have been a neat thing to have been included in today's Radio 4 Beyond Belief, instead of the daft waffle that was talked on the subject of life after death. *deep sighs*!!!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Chunderer,

Not an answer Hillside. Why do you define God as mythical?

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

See, that's the thing when you employ your remarkable facility for incomprehension and dishonesty. I don't define your or any other "god" as anything. When you say "god", I hear white noise. There's nothing for me to define. The point though is that, if you want anyone to take your statement "god" seriously as an objective fact, I don't have to - that's your job. And it's your job for exactly the same reason it would be my job to define "unicorn" or "Jack Frost" if I expected you to take these claims seriously.

As you have neither a definition nor a method even if you did have one to distinguish your clam from any other claim anyone else makes about any other non-material "something", I am though perfectly at liberty to class the stories you tell about this god - and for that matter the stories the others have about their respective objects of personal belief - as mythic.

And before you career off the rails again, no - just retro-fitting qualities that happen to appeal to you about your god says nothing to your basic problems of defining and verifying that supposed god in the first place.   

[Rhiannon]

it will hopefully be more meaningful than saying that a centaur is 'half man and half horse'!

How about 'Jesus is both fully divine and fully human'?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Chunderer,

For example Unicorns have a meaningful definition and are still mythical. Given that ,God cannot be mythical because of a lack of a meaningful definition.

Just for fun, try finding the basic logical mistake you make here. It's really very simple, but we both know from experience that if I explain it to you you'll just misrepresent the explanation and veer off into another cabbage patch of incomprehension.

Really - test yourself.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Rhi,

How about 'Jesus is both fully divine and fully human'?

How does incorporating a replacement un-defined term ("divine") into an internally contradictory statement (how can something be "fully" something and also "fully" something else?) constitute a definition of any kind?

[Rhiannon]

Rhi,

How does incorporating a replacement un-defined term ("divine") into an internally contradictory statement (how can something be "fully" something and also "fully" something else?) constitute a definition of any kind?

I don't know. Ask someone who believes it.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Blue,

Just for fun, try finding the basic logical mistake you make here. It's really very simple, but we both know from experience that if I explain it to you you'll just misrepresent the explanation and veer off into another cabbage patch of incomprehension.

What is the basic logical mistake, I promise I won't misrepresent, I have a definition of a unicorn and a leprechaun in my mind but most definitely not God, well except persistence, so where is the logical mistake.

Gonnagle.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hi Gonners,

What is the basic logical mistake, I promise I won't misrepresent, I have a definition of a unicorn and a leprechaun in my mind but most definitely not God, well except persistence, so where is the logical mistake.

Well, as long as you promise to keep it between just us...

...OK then. Ol' Vlunderingabouttheplace said the following:

"For example Unicorns have a meaningful definition and are still mythical. Given that ,God cannot be mythical because of a lack of a meaningful definition."

Even if for the sake of the conversation we agree that unicorns do in fact have "a meaningful definition" (a highly dubious proposition as by common repute they are possessed of magical powers rather than being just horses with wings), no-one argues that it's the absence of a meaningful definition for "god" that determines his mythic status.

There are all manner of gods, spooks and ghoulies that variously have lots of definition, some definition or barely any definition at all that we would all - Vlad included - accept as mythic: Thor, Robin Hood, Jack Frost, whatever. He is in other words knocking down a straw man version (yet again) of what's actually being said. Some of us find stories about "God" to be mythic for the same reason that we find stories about the man in the moon to be mythic - they fail to cohere with anything we observe about the way the universe appears to be, and their proponents give no reason whatever for us to think them not to be mythic.

The definitional problem is a major one for Vlad if he wants to establish this god in the first place (and that's before he finally even gets to a method to distinguish his claims about this will o' the wisp from anyone else's claim about any other supernatural entity - the problem he always runs away from) but it's not the major reason for finding his stories about this god to be mythic. 
   

[Rhiannon]

Isn't there a myth about the Christian god being beyond definition and understanding?

There's also one about him dictating/breathing a book that tells us what he does and thinks, too.